Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
05-20-2009, 07:31 PM
#31
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
I am not a fan of frivolous law suits plain and simple and I agree people should research products before purchasing. BUT,on the other hand,companies should NOT be allowed to blaitantly false advertise their product when they KNOW what they are portraying is false.
I have no idea of scent lok's knowledge to the accuracy of their claims and really am not that concerned about it.I love the dream season boots because of comfort and have never bought into the regeneration of carbon(well,maybe a little at first).The inserts have never been out of my boots.
Right now there is a commercial running on the outdoor channel everyday for one of the biggest names in archery with SEVERAL "pros" telling bold face lies about what they have "invented" IMO,that should never be allowed to happen.
I have no idea of scent lok's knowledge to the accuracy of their claims and really am not that concerned about it.I love the dream season boots because of comfort and have never bought into the regeneration of carbon(well,maybe a little at first).The inserts have never been out of my boots.
Right now there is a commercial running on the outdoor channel everyday for one of the biggest names in archery with SEVERAL "pros" telling bold face lies about what they have "invented" IMO,that should never be allowed to happen.
05-21-2009, 05:50 AM
#32
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
Blacktailslayer:
Good question . Here's my take on the whole situation. Thanks for the Quote.
First I think besides Lee Lakowsky (He certainly knows the truth) there are a number of TV and Prostaffers who need to respond to the hunting public for their endorsement of carbon clothing . Waddell and Nugent come to mind.
Carbon clothing companies need to provide actual proof of their claims or face the consequences of false advertising. They really have an up hill battle after the deposition of their own expert Dr.Amos Turk who admitted under oath that their product allowed human odor to pass through the garment unchanged and that the product contained very little carbon and was not effective in controling human odors. ( See Justia.com )
" 100 % of human odors 100% of the time "
" reactivate by putting in a household dryer"
I really don't think the lawsuit is the best answer but at the same time there really isn't another option. SL has used the courts for the past 10 years to control this market. Now they are going to be on the other side. Now they are being sued rather then being the ones who sue.( Robinson Labs twice , Gore , and No Trace ) Kind of poetic justice.
The real harm that has been done is that new and effective methods have been kept off the market. Take for example "No Trace ". They came with some new and interesting ideas and some real promise in the area of scent control. They were met with a lawsuit that destroyed the company and deprived the hunting public of a product that had real potential. As you read this there is testing being done on a new product that could change this whole debate. Some preliminary testing with dogs has been very encouraging and a major university is assisting in some research.
Good question . Here's my take on the whole situation. Thanks for the Quote.
First I think besides Lee Lakowsky (He certainly knows the truth) there are a number of TV and Prostaffers who need to respond to the hunting public for their endorsement of carbon clothing . Waddell and Nugent come to mind.
Carbon clothing companies need to provide actual proof of their claims or face the consequences of false advertising. They really have an up hill battle after the deposition of their own expert Dr.Amos Turk who admitted under oath that their product allowed human odor to pass through the garment unchanged and that the product contained very little carbon and was not effective in controling human odors. ( See Justia.com )
" 100 % of human odors 100% of the time "
" reactivate by putting in a household dryer"
I really don't think the lawsuit is the best answer but at the same time there really isn't another option. SL has used the courts for the past 10 years to control this market. Now they are going to be on the other side. Now they are being sued rather then being the ones who sue.( Robinson Labs twice , Gore , and No Trace ) Kind of poetic justice.
The real harm that has been done is that new and effective methods have been kept off the market. Take for example "No Trace ". They came with some new and interesting ideas and some real promise in the area of scent control. They were met with a lawsuit that destroyed the company and deprived the hunting public of a product that had real potential. As you read this there is testing being done on a new product that could change this whole debate. Some preliminary testing with dogs has been very encouraging and a major university is assisting in some research.
05-21-2009, 06:09 AM
#33
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 3,058
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
ORIGINAL: TFOX
I am not a fan of frivolous law suits plain and simple and I agree people should research products before purchasing. BUT,on the other hand,companies should NOT be allowed to blaitantly false advertise their product when they KNOW what they are portraying is false.
I am not a fan of frivolous law suits plain and simple and I agree people should research products before purchasing. BUT,on the other hand,companies should NOT be allowed to blaitantly false advertise their product when they KNOW what they are portraying is false.
From the research I've done, it seems that the silver thread clothing is the only proven material to help reduce scent as it works on destroying bacteria at the molecular level. I'll take scientific fact over paid endorsements any day of the week.
05-21-2009, 09:09 AM
#34
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Texas and Arkansas
Posts: 1,496
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
ORIGINAL: bigbulls
Theirslogan says they are "taking" the arch out of archery. Not that they "took" the arch out of archery. Besides that this slogan was when they were actually taking the arch out of archery. They had some of the fastest bows on the market back then which did, in fact, take much of the arch out of archery.
I am not trying to single you out but your response like thiswas the most recent. This is really meant for all that made similar comments.
So if a 14 year old hunter saved his hard earned lawn mowing money to purchase his___________(insert any brand here) carbon basedclothing so he could be a better hunter and get closer to bigger bucks like___________ (insert any "pro" hunters name here)because they all say it works all of the time every time andall he has to do is throw it in a dryer and it isgood as newhe should just suck it up and be glad that it only cost him $250 instead of $1250???????????
What if I sold you a carbon based water filtration kit and told you that all you had to do is throw the carbon bag filterin the dryer to reactivate the carbon and you could continue to use it indefinetly with no worries of health risks. One camping trip you come down with a life threatening illness that is directly linked to contaminated water. You believed my claims and followed my directions to a "T" but you have since learned that I was completely full of BS and none of my claims heald any merit what so ever. Would you just suck it up or would you sue me?
I hope they loose their butts in this law suit.
My Bowtechs have. Some have even done better than advertised IBO speeds.
Wonder who's gonna be the first to hold Bowtch's feet to the fire for actually NOT taking the arch out of archery???[8D]
I don't buy into Scent Lok's claims, but I think a lawsuit is overboard. A reasonably intelligent person should be able to make a decision based on his/her knowledge.
So if a 14 year old hunter saved his hard earned lawn mowing money to purchase his___________(insert any brand here) carbon basedclothing so he could be a better hunter and get closer to bigger bucks like___________ (insert any "pro" hunters name here)because they all say it works all of the time every time andall he has to do is throw it in a dryer and it isgood as newhe should just suck it up and be glad that it only cost him $250 instead of $1250???????????
What if I sold you a carbon based water filtration kit and told you that all you had to do is throw the carbon bag filterin the dryer to reactivate the carbon and you could continue to use it indefinetly with no worries of health risks. One camping trip you come down with a life threatening illness that is directly linked to contaminated water. You believed my claims and followed my directions to a "T" but you have since learned that I was completely full of BS and none of my claims heald any merit what so ever. Would you just suck it up or would you sue me?
I hope they loose their butts in this law suit.
After all, when has a bow ever performed to it's advertised IBO speed?
But, yes, I would suck it up, and move on, because it is a lesson learned the hard way that will stay with me the rest of my life.
05-21-2009, 11:13 AM
#35
Dominant Buck
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ramsey , Indiana
Posts: 22,545
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
The lawsuit is all about language, not necessarily science, Scent Lok has made claims that it can't support, and defrauded consumers as a result. With a background in chemistry Lee would be well aquainted with the properties of activated carbon, since he's been promoting Scent Lok insupport oftheir exaggerated claims then he's as guilty of fraud as they are.
05-21-2009, 11:24 AM
#36
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: IOWA/25' UP
Posts: 7,145
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
It takes a temp anywhere from 800-1300 degrees according to the scientific community to reactivate carbon from what I have read. Now, if Scentlok says you can reactivate it in a household dryer which gets 180 tops, how is carbon going to be reactivated?
Cracks me up when people defend this snake oil cause they were goofy enough to buy it or saw a deer one time that was downwind and didn't smell them. It is called updrafts and swirling winds that helped you not get detected..not some ridiculous consumer rip off. Either carbon can be reactivated in a household dryer, or it can't. It is cut and dry; no room for argument. Science is science is science. Duh
If it can't be reactivated, than you have defrauded consumers with BLATANT false advertising. Sue their butts off.
An excerpt from this ad
Here is an ad that says simply airing them out reactivates the carbon
I will bet there are still people here that say the snake oil works and better yet, feel that Scentlok should be able to dupe the consumer with such ridiculous claims and that the lawyers are asses for suing Scentlok andnot allowing Scentlok to continue lying to consumers. Sure, many of us know the FACTS regarding carbon clothing, because we educated ourselves about carbon clothing's fallacy. How about the 12 year old kid that says he has to have it cause Lee, Tiff, Drurys, and all of the others that accept this carbon clothing snake oil as a sponsor, sell their soul to this junk for their sponsorship $$, and tell that little 12 year old that he needs it to be successful? SHAME
The 1st guy I listed supposedly has a chemistry degree, and still accepted the sponsorship $$. For shame.
Cracks me up when people defend this snake oil cause they were goofy enough to buy it or saw a deer one time that was downwind and didn't smell them. It is called updrafts and swirling winds that helped you not get detected..not some ridiculous consumer rip off. Either carbon can be reactivated in a household dryer, or it can't. It is cut and dry; no room for argument. Science is science is science. Duh
If it can't be reactivated, than you have defrauded consumers with BLATANT false advertising. Sue their butts off.
An excerpt from this ad
Here is an ad that says simply airing them out reactivates the carbon
I will bet there are still people here that say the snake oil works and better yet, feel that Scentlok should be able to dupe the consumer with such ridiculous claims and that the lawyers are asses for suing Scentlok andnot allowing Scentlok to continue lying to consumers. Sure, many of us know the FACTS regarding carbon clothing, because we educated ourselves about carbon clothing's fallacy. How about the 12 year old kid that says he has to have it cause Lee, Tiff, Drurys, and all of the others that accept this carbon clothing snake oil as a sponsor, sell their soul to this junk for their sponsorship $$, and tell that little 12 year old that he needs it to be successful? SHAME
The 1st guy I listed supposedly has a chemistry degree, and still accepted the sponsorship $$. For shame.
05-21-2009, 05:38 PM
#37
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 6,867
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
who care if you do not use it fine if you do and think it takes away 100 of your smell well stupidy do not earn you a check. Come on guys. Let move on use it or not do not buy it and then sue them for millons because that 200 class buck busted your butt
05-21-2009, 05:53 PM
#38
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,679
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
ORIGINAL: GRIZZLYMAN
Even when I was 14, which was a lot of years ago, I was taught not to take advertiser's claims at face value. Maybe I was raised differently than most.
But, yes, I would suck it up, and move on, because it is a lesson learned the hard way that will stay with me the rest of my life.
ORIGINAL: bigbulls
Theirslogan says they are "taking" the arch out of archery. Not that they "took" the arch out of archery. Besides that this slogan was when they were actually taking the arch out of archery. They had some of the fastest bows on the market back then which did, in fact, take much of the arch out of archery.
I am not trying to single you out but your response like thiswas the most recent. This is really meant for all that made similar comments.
So if a 14 year old hunter saved his hard earned lawn mowing money to purchase his___________(insert any brand here) carbon basedclothing so he could be a better hunter and get closer to bigger bucks like___________ (insert any "pro" hunters name here)because they all say it works all of the time every time andall he has to do is throw it in a dryer and it isgood as newhe should just suck it up and be glad that it only cost him $250 instead of $1250???????????
What if I sold you a carbon based water filtration kit and told you that all you had to do is throw the carbon bag filterin the dryer to reactivate the carbon and you could continue to use it indefinetly with no worries of health risks. One camping trip you come down with a life threatening illness that is directly linked to contaminated water. You believed my claims and followed my directions to a "T" but you have since learned that I was completely full of BS and none of my claims heald any merit what so ever. Would you just suck it up or would you sue me?
I hope they loose their butts in this law suit.
My Bowtechs have. Some have even done better than advertised IBO speeds.
Wonder who's gonna be the first to hold Bowtch's feet to the fire for actually NOT taking the arch out of archery???[8D]
I don't buy into Scent Lok's claims, but I think a lawsuit is overboard. A reasonably intelligent person should be able to make a decision based on his/her knowledge.
So if a 14 year old hunter saved his hard earned lawn mowing money to purchase his___________(insert any brand here) carbon basedclothing so he could be a better hunter and get closer to bigger bucks like___________ (insert any "pro" hunters name here)because they all say it works all of the time every time andall he has to do is throw it in a dryer and it isgood as newhe should just suck it up and be glad that it only cost him $250 instead of $1250???????????
What if I sold you a carbon based water filtration kit and told you that all you had to do is throw the carbon bag filterin the dryer to reactivate the carbon and you could continue to use it indefinetly with no worries of health risks. One camping trip you come down with a life threatening illness that is directly linked to contaminated water. You believed my claims and followed my directions to a "T" but you have since learned that I was completely full of BS and none of my claims heald any merit what so ever. Would you just suck it up or would you sue me?
I hope they loose their butts in this law suit.
After all, when has a bow ever performed to it's advertised IBO speed?
But, yes, I would suck it up, and move on, because it is a lesson learned the hard way that will stay with me the rest of my life.
Man I wish everyone thought the same way that you do because if that is your reasoning I have anew "invention"that is "scientifically proven" to allow the hunter to kill more bucks.I will sell you this "invention" for $250 dollars eachand I guarantee you that if you follow my directions to the "T" you will see and kill more record book deer than you ever have before. I guarantee it will work 100% every time. Want one?
05-21-2009, 07:24 PM
#39
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,139
RE: Scent LoK & Lee Lakowsky
I would like to see all advertisers held accountable for the claims they make about their products.
laundry detergent ads claiming they will remove all stains - BS
then there are all the truck, boat, snowmobile, atv ads showing how you can abuse their product yet most of these activities would voidmost warrantees. again BS
As long as we are at it lets hold all politicians liable for their campaign promises.
As much as I hate all these lawsuits lately I think it might be a good thing to get companies to truthfully represent their products.
Here's another laughter - one coat paint. BS x 10
I would like to go to a sporting goods store and beat the hell out of an ugly stick fishing pole like the gal on TV does and see how the clerk would react. lol (and while doing it keep yelling "you are not going fishing today")
We have seemed to just accept these ads and the companies are taking advantage of it.
laundry detergent ads claiming they will remove all stains - BS
then there are all the truck, boat, snowmobile, atv ads showing how you can abuse their product yet most of these activities would voidmost warrantees. again BS
As long as we are at it lets hold all politicians liable for their campaign promises.
As much as I hate all these lawsuits lately I think it might be a good thing to get companies to truthfully represent their products.
Here's another laughter - one coat paint. BS x 10
I would like to go to a sporting goods store and beat the hell out of an ugly stick fishing pole like the gal on TV does and see how the clerk would react. lol (and while doing it keep yelling "you are not going fishing today")
We have seemed to just accept these ads and the companies are taking advantage of it.
